THE SOURCES OF DHARMA PART II By Dr. RAJENDRA CHANDRA HAZRA The long period which intervened between the compilation of the comparatively early Vedic works and that of the extant treatises on Dharma, was responsible not only for the extinction of a number of Vedic schools which had grown up in different parts of India but also for serious changes in the social and religious life of the people all over the country. The [Altharva-veda] played, and was still playing, its important part in moulding the social and religious life of the Hindus and came to be recognised very widely, though not universally, as the fourth Veda and as one of the primary sources of Dharma; but there were many rites, customs and usages which could not be traced direct to any of the four Vedas. So, for their own interest and intergrity it became absolutely necessary for the followers of the Vedas to recognise some such secondary sources as could serve as the basis of, and also give sanctity and respectability to, these time-honoured rites, customs and usages. It is not our intention here to assert that the recognition of secondary sources of Dharmas was a matter of the post-Vedic period. We cannot say with any amount of certainly that at all times during the Veidc period all the rites, customs and usages of the Vedic people could betraced to the Vedas. It is well-known that the Vedic Samhitas were not really meant for recording or dictating Dharma, popular or otherwise; and the personality and freeedom of will of a man even of the Vedic age could not but induce him on occasions, however rare, to sterp out of the beaten track of his forefathers and put new practices into force. So, it is quite possible that the recognition of at least some of the secondary sources of Dharma had its beginning in the Vedic age. But as we have gotno realiable record of such early recognition, we come down to a comparatively late period during which the famous works of [Jaimini], [Gautama], [Baudhayana], [Apastamba] and others were compiled. In this [Purva-mimamsa-sutra], which is the earliest of the extant works on [Mimamsa], [Jaimini] recognises some secondary source or sources of Dharma, for which he uses the terms ['a'sabda', 'anumana' and 'Smrti']. As the first two terms are vague and generally comprehensive and do not help us in any way understand correctly the nature turn to the ['Sabara-bhasya] for clarification and find that ['Sabara-svamin] takes these two terms to mean ['Smrti']. If ['Sabara-svamin's] interpretation is correct, then we are to admit that Jaimini recognises nothing other than ['Smrti'] as a secondary source of Dharma a. In the [Kausitaki-grhya-sutra] also we find mention of only ['Sruti] and [Smrti] of those thoroughly conversant with tradition'(vi. 6.16.......Yathagama-Prajna-'sruti-smti-vibhavat.......). But the jurist Gautama goes a step farther and names 'Smrti' and 'Sila' as secondary sources, saying: "vedo dharma-mulam/tad-vidam ca smrti-'sile/" "The Veda is the source (or root) of Dharma, and (also) the tradition and practice of those who know it (i.e., the Veda)". [Baudhyayana] also says: "upadisto dharmah prati-vedam /smarto dvitiyah/trtiyah 'sistagamah/" "(The first and foremost kind pof ) Dharma has been instructed in every Veda. The seond (kind of 8it ) is what is declared in Smrtis; (and) the third is the practice of the ['Sistas]". According to [Apastamba], the acts of Dharma are those which are evolved from conventions and practices(samayacarika), and the authorities on these are teh conventions of those who know Dharma, and the Vedas. Vasistha says: "'Sruti-smrti-vihito dharmah/tad-alabhe 'sistacarah pramanam/" "Dharma is presecribed by 'Sruti and Smrti. In the absence of these (two) the practive of the 'Sistas is the authority." It is to be noted that for the term ''sila' of Gautama, Baudhayana uses "['sistagama]" and Vasistha has ["'sistacara]", whereas [Apastamba] employs the word "[dharmajna-samaya]" to mean both "smrti" and "'sistacara". That the word ''sila' 9derived from the root ''sil' meaning 'to do', 'to practise'), as occuring in Gautama's [Sutra], means [Harita] and the [Mahabharata], is shown by the immediately following two [Sutras](1.3-4) of Gautama which run as follows: "drsto dharma-vyatikramah [sahasam ca mahatam/avara-daurbalyat/]" of great (men) are found. (But), on account of want of strength (of character) of the people of later ages, (these acts must not be taken by them as authorities on Dharma). In the first of these two [Sutras], two kinds of unlawful acts of great men have been distinguished, viz., these which make their doers guilty of transgression of Dharma (dharma-vyatikrama) and other which are classed separately as commission of rashness (sahasa). As all these immoral acts are cited as forming exceptions to ''sila', the latter must be taken in a much wider sense to mean "practive' (acara) in general (and not merely 'brahmanyata', 'deva-pitr-bhaktata', etc., as enumerated by Harita and the Mahabharata). In commenting on these [Sutras Haradatta] gives for [''silam'] the synonym 'anusthanam'; and Maskari takes thsi word to mean those practives (samacara) which, being numerous and also different in and [sahasa], as cited by Haradatta, Maskari, Devanabhatta and others, should also be considered in this connection. Going to explain the significance of the word ''sista' (meaning 'cultured') Baudhayana says: "Verily the 'Sistas are those who have their envy and pride gone, who keep corn of the measurement of a [Kumbhi] (only), who are not greedy, and who are devoid of hypocrisy, arrogance, covetousness, delusion and anger. "Those (persons, again,) are 'Sistas who have learnt the Veda in the prescribed manner together with its supplements, who known the inferences (drawn) from it, and who are (to others) the causes of direct perception of 'Sruti (i.e., who not only conveyto others the instruction of the Veda but also make tham appreciate its teachings by assiduously performing the acts prescribed by it). Vasistha describes a 'Sista thus: "A 'Sista is one who got no desire in his mind", and "Those [Brahmins] are known as 'Sistas to whom the Vedas has come down in succession with its supplements and who are (to others) the causes of direct perception of 'Sruti". Manu agrees with Vasistha in characterising the 'Sistas, and [Harita] takes them to be those who are given to (the practice of ) the prescriptions of 'Sruti and Smrti. From the opinions cited above regarding the characteristics of 'Sistas it is evident that according to Gautama, [Baudhayana] and other earlier authorities, the study and knowledge of the Vedas was a necessary condition of ''Sistatva' (culture) and thusformed the basis of 'Sila, 'Sistagama or 'Sistacara. It was also universally admitted by the Smrtikaras and the [Mimamsakas] that no tradition handed down from generation to generation in the families of persons other than those (Brahmins) who learnt and studied the Vedas and also assiduously performed the acts prescribede by these works, was to be recognised as ['Smrti'] which formed a secondary source of Dharma. So, according to Gautama and others, both 'smrti' and ''sistacara' (or ''sila' or ''sistagama') had a common basis, viz., the study and knowledge of the Vedas; and this was a very strict limitation imposed upon ['sistacara'], because it is not at all improbable that in the days of Gautama and others when the social and reliious life of the people became more complex than in earlier days, there were some widely popular and firmly essatablished traditions and customs which had been started or handed down by persons who, though not learned in the Vedas, belonged to the Vedic fold and were highly respected for their character, conduct and attainments. It is not that Gautama and other comparatively early writers on Dharma were not alive to this fact, otherwise they would not make provisions for the recognition of the peculiar customs or usages of particular countries, towns, villages castes, guilds, families, associations, etc., as valid and binding for the respective places or bodies, in case these peculiar customs or usages did not go against the prescriptions of the Vedas and the traditions and customs of the 'Sistas. Thus, in the works of Gautama, [Baudhayana], [Apastamba and A'svalayana] we find the following provisions: "The laws (dharmah) of countries, castes, and families, which are not opposed to the (sacred) records (amnaya), (have) also authority. Culitivators, traders, herdsmen, money-lenders, and artizans (have authority to lay down rules) for their respectiveclasses. Having learned the (state of) affairs from those who (in each class) have authority (to speak he shall give) the legal decision." "There is a dispute regarding five (practices) both in the south and in the north. We shall explain those (peculiar) to the south. They are, to eat in the company of an uninitiated person, to eat in the company of one's wife, to eat stale food, to marry the daughter of a maternal uncle or a paternal aunt. Now (the customs peculiar) to the north are, to deal in wood, to drink in rum, to sell animals that have teeth in the upper and in the lower jaws, to follows trade of arms, to go to sea. he who follows (these practices) in any other country than where they prevail, commits sin. For each (of these customs) the (rule of the ) country should be (considered) the authority. Gautama declares that is false. And one should not take heed of either (set of practices) because they are opposed to the tradition of the 'Sistas." "He shall regulate his course of action according tot he conduct which in all countries is unanimously approved of by men of the three twice-born castes, who have been properly obedient (to their teachers), who are aged, of subdued senses, neither given to avarice, nor hypocrites." "By this (discussion) the law of custom (dharma), which is observed in (particular) countries or families, has been disposed of ." "Various indeed are the customs (prevailing) in countries and villages; one should follow them in marriage. What, however, is common (to all), we shall declare." Some of these writers accepted the customs (acara), prevalent in [Aryavarta], as authoritative for all. Some, again, went so far as to acknowledge the authority of women and the common run of people (loka) in the matter of certain customs and usages, especially those connected with marriage and funeral rites and ceremonies. For instances we amy refer to the following passages: [Apastamba-dharma-sutra] ii. 6. 15. 9 - They (i.e., the persons taking part in the cremation of a dead body) pour out water consecrated in such a manner that the dead will know it (to be given to them). Then they return to the village (grama) without looking back, and perform those rites for the dead which women declare to be necessary. [Apastamba-dharma-sutra] ii. 11. 29. 16 - Some declare that the remaining duties (which have not been taught in the Apastamba-dharma-sutra) must be learnt from women and men of all castes. [Baudhayana-dharma-sutra] i. 5. 112 - In (performing) the remaining rites (connected with teh dead, one should) conform to (the customs of) the people (lokah). [Apastamba-grhya-sutra 2. 15- And one should learn from (all including) women what ceremonies (are required by custom in marriage). [Paraskara-grhya-sutra i.8. 11-13- And what (the people in) the village tell them, that they should do. For it is said, 'At weddings adn funerals he shall enter the village'; (and) because the 'Sruti says, 'Therefore on these two occasions authority rests with the village'. [Manava-grhya-sutra (Baroda ed.) i. 4. 6-(There are) other (holidays) according to custom. From these passages it is evident that Gautama and others attached due importance even to many ancient rites and customs of popular origin; yet they placed the aforesaid limitation on 'sistacara, which they recognised as one of the three sources of Dharma. The reason for this limitation seems to be that, as the [Baudhaayana-dharma-sutra indicates, they wanted to distinguish between two kinds of Dharma, viz., superior (parama) and inferior (avara or upadharma, as the later writers call it) and to prescrible the former to the ardent students and followers of the Vedas. As the works of Gautama and other early [Sutra-writers] were originally meant for use in the Vedic schools, there was practically no difficulty in making this distinction and prescription. However, they did not like to put any restriction, as regards the performance of the two kinds of Dharma, on the different grades of the Aryan population, except on ['Sudras], women, outcastes, and the fallen or naturally disabled members of the Aryan society. During the few centurries which followed the ages [Baudhayana] and [Apastamba], serious changes came upon the social, religious and political life of the Hindus. India was repeatedly invaded by casteless foreigners who entered this country in hordes and oftern settled down permenantly in its different parts. Buddhism, Jainism and a number of other heretical faiths grew up and attained vwide popularity; and there were also the systems of the [Pancaratras], [Pa'supatas], [Brahmas], and others, who, as the [Mahabharata] and the early [Puranas] inform us, often held views very different from those of the followers of the VEdas. Like the heretical faiths these systems also spread widely among the people and influenced even those who believed deeply inthe Vedic way of life. Thus, according to the [Jayakhya-samhita], the adherents to the [Pancaratra] system consisted of three groups, the second comprising the [Aptas], [Anaptas], [Arambhins] and [Sampravartins]. The [Aptas] were those who joined the order wholeheartedly; and the rest have been described in the [Jayakhya-samhita] as follows : varna-dharmam anujjhitya hy [aptadistena karmana]/ Yajanti 'sraddhaya devam [anaptas] te prakirtitah// [vina tenartha-siddhyartham vi'svatmanam ] Yajanti ye/ [arambhinas te boddhavya vaisnava brahmanadayah]// ['sraddhaya ye pravartante svayam sampujane hareh]/ [amargena tu viprendra viddhi tan sampravartinah]// "Those, we do not give up thier caste-duties but faithfully worship the god (Visnu) with acts prescribed by the [Aptas], are called [Anaptas]. The Vaisnava Brahmins and others who, without (caring for) these (i.e., the instruction s of the Aptas), worship the Soul of the Universe for the attainment of the desired objects, are called [Arambhins]. O best of Brahmins, known those people as Sampravartins who faithfully devote themselves to worshipping Hari in a wrong way." To the [Pa'supata] and othersystems also, as the [Mahabharata] and the [Puranas] inidcate, there much have been adherents of the types of the [Aptas], [Anaptas], [Arambhins] and Sampravartins, who were certainly not looked upon as outcastes by those who were faithful to the [Vara'srama-dharma]. There were, again, the upholders of the composite Dharma advocated by tghe sectarian [Puranas, which must have begun their activity long before the beginning of the Christian era. On the other hand, the sacrificial religion and the study of the Vedas were growing unpopular under the pressure of the religious faiths mentioned above, so much so that even by the time of Manu a number of extra-Vedic Smrtis came into existence; and this is indicated by the following verse of the (Manusmrti 12. 95): [Ya veda-bahyah smrtayo ya's ca ka's ca ku- drstayah]/ [sarvas ta nisphalah pretya tamo-nistha hi tah smrtah]// "Those Smrt is which are outside (the pale of ) the Veda, and those (others)in which there is bad vision, are all useless after death, because they have been declared as based solely on ignorance".